Harrison Township: Garbageville
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Wednesday, Nov. 27, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Welcome to Garbageville, i.e., Harrison Township.
I recently visited the Harrison ordinance and zoning offices and complained about non-containerized garbage, open garbage containers and debris stored in alleys. Residents must think the garbage collectors clean up the mess, but that is not their job. In the meantime, the wind blows, the birds peck open plastic bags and dogs, raccoons and other animals scavenge for food. It's a mess.
The ordinance reads: “Residents are responsible for taking their garbage to the curb or alley and returning containers to their property.”
When I asked the township solicitor, Charles Means, for his opinion on what to do, he said a garbage container placed close to the alley is located on the owner's property under the ordinance. Even though the garbage cans may be located within the township's alley right-of-way, he said, they are still located upon the property of the owners, not on township property.
Huh? So even if a can is in the middle of the township's road, Harrison considers that our property. And although no property owner has recorded title to the middle of the alleys, the township says it's ours.
What next? Will we be forced to pay back taxes and future taxes on our new “property?”
The good news is with all of the garbage, property devaluation might lower our taxes.
What happened to the welfare of the community?
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Knives vs. guns II
- Knives vs. guns I
- Consequences in space
- Tragedy sensationalized
- Bloomberg & coal
- Resurrection? Yes, really